Electronic gambling machines, also known as poker machines and the like, are a popular form of gambling in many countries throughout the world. Therefore, the background details will focus on gambling issues as they relate to electronic gambling machines. The other forms of gambling, whilst important in terms of social issues when compared to gambling on electronic gambling machines, are relatively minor compared with issues regarding electronic gambling machines.
In most countries surveyed throughout the world, problem gambling involving electronic gambling machines has become a major social issue with financial harm being suffered by a significant proportion of gamblers and their families. The problem has been intensely studied in Australia where expenditure on electronic gambling machines comprises around 62% of all gambling. In the Australian Productivity Commission's report of 2010 it was estimated that one in six people who play poker machines regularly are problem gamblers, at various levels of addictiveness, and account for 40% of gambling machine revenue. Furthermore, problem gambling is difficult to recognise with only 15% of problem gamblers seeking counseling and support for their problems. Many can go on for years hiding their gambling problem from others. The primary focus of proposed regulatory controls and of this invention is the pathologically addictive gambler who accounts for an estimated 1.5% of all electronic gambling machine players, however, this invention will have the capability to identify various levels of less addictive gamblers.
Regulators and others across the world have implemented many policies aimed at minimizing the losses from problem gamblers playing on electronic gambling machines. Most of these policies impose restrictions on all gamblers even though for most gambling is an enjoyable pursuit without harm. Typically, these restrictions may involve periods of machine shutdown, maximum betting limits, ATM (Automatic Teller Machine) withdrawal limits, payout limits, reduced input levels, clocks on machines, voluntary and mandatory pre-commitment systems, voluntary and mandatory restriction on access to venues, and so on. Many of these systems have very high implementation and administration costs with little benefit to non problem gamblers.
Other complex and comprehensive systems have been proposed that involve mandatory biometric identification devices, networking of electronic gambling machines, mandatory registration of gamblers, centralized storage on remote servers of gambler profiles including their gambling records, playing restrictions, etc.
These systems can only be effective once a problem gambler has been somehow identified, reported by a third party, or has self reported. Unfortunately, as mentioned before, very few problem gamblers seek support for their problem and less than 15% of pathological gamblers recognise and accept that they have a gambling or addictive problem.
It is to be understood that, if any prior art information is referred to herein; such reference does not constitute an admission that the information forms part of the common general knowledge in the art, in Australia or any other country.